Is India weaponising cricket for political leverage over smaller neighbours?

Cricket's global authorities are under renewed scrutiny after a dispute involving Bangladesh fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman triggered a diplomatic row between his country and India, raising questions about the neutrality of the game ahead of the 2026 Men's T20 World Cup.

The episode has intensified debate over India's influence in global cricket governance. India generates the largest share of the sport's commercial revenue, and critics argue that this financial weight translates into decisive leverage within the International Cricket Council or ICC, the international sport's body. 

New Delhi has reportedly threatened to take action if Bangladesh insists on moving its matches in the upcoming tournament outside of India. 

The tournament, scheduled from February 7 to March 8, will be co-hosted by India and Sri Lanka. It will see players from twenty countries vie for the title in limited-overs matches to be played in India and Sri Lanka. 

The controversy started after an Indian club terminated Rahman's contract following the orders of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). Dhaka has since said it will send players for the tournament only if Bangladesh's matches are moved to another country. 

ICC chairman Jay Shah told Bangladesh it must play in India or face consequences, a claim denied by Bangladeshi officials.

Shah is the son of India's Home Minister Amit Shah, a close ally of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Several commentators in India warned that BCCI's interference and barring of Rahman from the country's local league risked undermining New Delhi's regional interests.

Historian Ramachandra Guha described the move as "deeply unwise", arguing that cricket has historically helped manage tensions in South Asia.

Veteran journalist Rajdeep Sardesai questioned whether cricket decisions were being driven by sporting bodies or political calculations, calling the episode an example of ad hoc foreign policy.

Other voices defended the BCCI's stance, framing cricket as a legitimate extension of geopolitical pressure. Sports editor GS Vivek said the decision reflected a strategic approach to relations with neighbouring states, positioning cricket as a diplomatic tool.

Rahman, widely known as 'The Fizz', was signed by Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) at auction in December last year for more than $1 million.

Days later, the franchise released him following instructions from the BCCI, according to Indian and Bangladeshi officials.

Neither the BCCI nor KKR provided a public explanation for the decision.

The move followed protests by Hindu nationalist groups in parts of India, which demanded Rahman's removal and argued that Bangladeshi players should not compete in the country.

The protests cited alleged attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh, claims denied by Dhaka, which has said there is no state-backed or systematic targeting of religious minorities.

Bangladesh's interim government linked Rahman's release to a broader deterioration in relations with India since the 2024 removal of former prime minister Sheikh Hasina, who has taken refuge in India after a popular youth uprising deposed her. 

India had publicly supported Hasina and later granted her refuge, a decision criticised by Bangladesh's current leadership.

The controversy quickly escalated beyond the IPL.

Bangladesh formally asked the ICC to relocate its matches for the 2026 Men's T20 World Cup away from India, citing security concerns and government advice.

Bangladesh are due to play three group matches in India, including fixtures in Kolkata and Mumbai.

Bangladesh's Youth and Sports Adviser Asif Nazrul said the issue went beyond safety. "We think it is not only a matter of security but also that of national humiliation," he earlier told reporters.

Nazrul said correspondence from the ICC raised concerns linked to Rahman's presence in the squad, Bangladeshi fans wearing team jerseys in India and domestic elections in Bangladesh.

He argued that such factors made participation in India untenable.

The ICC, however, said its internal security assessment found no specific or heightened threat to the Bangladesh team, a report by ESPNCricinfo said.

It said that the assessment concluded there was no overall risk, with low to moderate concerns at some venues and low to nil risk at others, categories the ICC applies routinely across tournaments.

The ICC also rejected suggestions that it had set conditions on team selection, fan behaviour or domestic political schedules, describing Nazrul's remarks as a misreading of standard contingency planning.

Bangladesh's cricket board later clarified that the assessment did not constitute a formal response to its request to move matches out of India and said it was still awaiting an official decision from the ICC.

Following Rahman's removal from the IPL, Bangladesh banned domestic broadcasts of the IPL and reiterated its refusal to play World Cup matches in India under current conditions.

Indian cricket authorities have not issued a public response to Bangladesh's request.

The standoff echoes earlier disputes involving India and Pakistan.

Since the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, India has refused to tour Pakistan, citing security concerns.

For the 2025 Champions Trophy, hosted by Pakistan, the ICC allowed India to play all its matches at a neutral venue in the United Arab Emirates.

Pakistan accepted the arrangement after securing reciprocal assurances for future tournaments in India. Under a similar "hybrid model" — which allows matches to be played at a neutral venue. 

If approved, it would extend a mechanism once treated as an exception into a wider regional norm, further fragmenting tournament hosting in South Asia.

The ICC has not indicated whether it will alter the 2026 schedule.